|Re: Public Wants Court to Okay Wiretaps|
11 Jan 2006 09:34:34 -0800
Phil Earnhardt wrote:|
> On 10 Jan 2006 07:43:29 -0800, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
>> Bad behavior is bad behavior.
> A conjecture is a conjecture.
Not a conjecture. A statement. I don't believe in situational
>> It should be condemned because its WRONG!
> Actually, it should be condemned IF it is wrong. AFAICT, this is more
There was a court set up to issue warrants. That court was bypassed.
> Is there any reason that there's almost no public debate about this issue?
The public is being fed garbage from most news sources. There are
> Instead of creating "news" -- contracting for self-serving polls that
This is a good suggestion. Most polls are commisioned by someone, and
|Post Followup Article||Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply|
|Go to Next message: danny burstein: "Re: Registering Multiple DIDs on the "Do-Not-Call" List"|
|Go to Previous message: Scott Dorsey: "Re: History of Hayes Modem"|
|May be in reply to: Katherine Shrader: "Public Wants Court to Okay Wiretaps"|
|Next in thread: Phil Earnhardt: "Re: Public Wants Court to Okay Wiretaps"|
|TELECOM Digest: Home Page|